Received: from localhost ([::1]:53522 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eV86G-0008Lg-Hx; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:46:20 -0800 Received: from mail-yw0-f172.google.com ([209.85.161.172]:43044) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1eV85l-0008Jz-1g for llg-members@lojban.org; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:45:49 -0800 Received: by mail-yw0-f172.google.com with SMTP id n25so9940296ywh.10 for ; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:45:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=rWx7JnFeH/ZsN/rAJyPlDXZ9P92y6oI7yold/VCSRCQ=; b=mN7Z3Nywhg3UvXDoOpncIslD+8g+PrNvqGQuh7LvFAS0BKMrdZ4Sg6/u5iEqw3IbCe aGRz3pM1fcMaWIwxQiWH9lF6fbgaGn7K60D97SAIKq1Mmz1MMJ63rfD9x2hrEt0YSM6b 2EmqzQETMbjCpHfq87UpZE5B9mUgVB+XFDWMonFVOxstE7OYU+dhh6km7OVl2oP+DG/g ulZ3DWGdZFRXpewpE+pfVjOO0a3z4eMF1fmMu+inWR43SJQ6sO2lSPMmBH3q/lfjk2JP IUdMvs1Y+eupPcgtVKksMp5VkdoKSMt0zF6dXY11ycCpWmLb1Fwon0SDT/ZuAq3S+IDF Y03Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=rWx7JnFeH/ZsN/rAJyPlDXZ9P92y6oI7yold/VCSRCQ=; b=aySC7ZRDQSN/NkM5k2VHNNhmm1MspBo7bpWMC/5i9x6cK4scoPToTiqUw3CfxFg0pm 1UQj1Na+YSAh5AcB+YppZx32+Yv+MtOPQxSm/apMIaoN09ajGA70MKlxcwb5Hgv+FsUI RQXxpx7zkzjie4yJBdNqeBq0uO9r555KclqsMR/LJ0G3kYfLpXFKKLw2N7a16wCISRrg G+lR81z2hx06DrVZG9nVNXNCKWdH1fbzCcVNAZatHeaByiP9IKRCjRTVT1y2rmMNkXex Z5PDj9lPkHIFJrwkJLMOzE2pUgTrZQdexd4p9XeykZ2ydvjWviimOb47asryuH7wDU86 FETQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mL7lYTO1gK69EduIQud6q9E2XtMbuZMTC9ONsJXQVjdgaZxX+qB uIA7PakCLi/yRuAwCi1IdORHerOKjVSotQli1YU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBovHniwPSOJ4iAD2cvauipP3oyP9MuU+UJhlXyeSbqTNY996btFwj38cs2GLgCwx7y8CMUzD3ZilUS6oE4qUsSE= X-Received: by 10.129.175.72 with SMTP id x8mr24939802ywj.277.1514605542129; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:45:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.37.135.9 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:45:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.37.135.9 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Dec 2017 19:45:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <7074953.2veMK8YGUJ@caracal> <6c826210-9f71-1813-2957-7e5593ad18ed@lojban.org> From: Curtis Franks Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2017 22:45:41 -0500 Message-ID: To: llg-members@lojban.org X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.5 X-Spam_score_int: -14 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [Llg-members] Unfinished Business: BPFK X-BeenThere: llg-members@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-members@lojban.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1276463435487655194==" Errors-To: llg-members-bounces@lojban.org --===============1276463435487655194== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="f403045f292850465605618695dc" --f403045f292850465605618695dc Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration and promotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the exploration and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical language)). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creation of a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously mentioned standards. How do we do this? What proposals or orientations are actionable? On Dec 29, 2017 10:30, "And Rosta" wrote: > > > On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" wrote: > > The bylaws were formulated to broadly cover a variety of forms of > research into logical languages, and there has always been the possibility > of conducting or supporting such research. But to put it simply, no one has > been interested in such research EXCEPT in the form of promoting and > studying the use of Lojban. > > That statement is patently false and wilfully amnesiac. > > I was for many years the most vocal proponent of the LLG's mission to > explore logical language, as opposed to the mission to promote Lojban. As a > member of LLG and the Lojban community I eventually changed my position, > but this was because it became increasingly evident to me that the two > goals (of exploring and promoting logical language, versus promoting > Lojban) are in fact antithetical; within LLG and the Lojban community, a > victory for the one goal can be achieved only through the defeat of the > other; but success in the goal of promoting Lojban can be achieved only > within LLG and the Lojban community, whereas success in the goal of > promoting logical language can be achieved outside it; many promoters of > Lojban (as opposed to logical language) have invested much of their life's > work in the enterprise, and pursuing the failure of another's life's work > should be avoided where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban community > should be left to promote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore > must not be required to promote logical language). > > > Indeed, there is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages", which > I admit to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never have been - > languages are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult to properly > "invent" with the complete full documentation needed for new people to > learn and use them. So I hope selpa'i will forgive me if I don't look at > his own efforts at a new "logical language". > > This is all true, except that the Lojban that Lojbab endorses is not a > logical language, for all that it might falsely advertise itself as such. > > The antipathy Lojbab describes exists because Lojban seeks to accrue users > and promotes itself by falsely claiming to be a logical language. Any > logical language is therefore a rival to Lojban. And Lojban's false claim > to be a logical language, coupled with its comparative fame, is an obstacle > to -- a distraction from -- the promotion of logical language. > > > > > So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but > until then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote > the purposes described in the Bylaws. > > > Again, patent bullshit. > > > While I would be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes > described in the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its > baselined and current forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban > community rather than from the logical language community, it is obviously > and not unreasonably the case that the large majority of LLG members > prioritize the promotion of Lojban over the promotion of the purposes > described in the Bylaws. > > --And. > > _______________________________________________ > Llg-members mailing list > Llg-members@lojban.org > http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members > > --f403045f292850465605618695dc Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Okay, maybe we should take on both projects (exploration = and promotion of logical language in general and also, separately, the expl= oration and promotion of Lojban (regardless of its status as a logical lang= uage)). We might also want to create or establish a framework for the creat= ion of a Lojban derivative which is a logical language by all previously me= ntioned standards.

How do we d= o this? What proposals or orientations are actionable?

On Dec 29, 2017 10:30, &qu= ot;And Rosta" <and.rosta@gma= il.com> wrote:


On 26 Dec 2017 19:36, "Bob LeChevalier" <<= a href=3D"mailto:lojbab@lojban.org" target=3D"_blank">lojbab@lojban.org= > wrote:
> The bylaws we= re formulated to broadly cover a variety of forms of research into logical = languages, and there has always been the possibility of conducting or suppo= rting such research. But to put it simply, no one has been interested in su= ch research EXCEPT in the form of promoting and studying the use of Lojban.=

That statement is patently false and wilfully amnesiac= .

I was for many years the most vocal proponent of the = LLG's mission to explore logical language, as opposed to the mission to= promote Lojban. As a member of LLG and the Lojban community I eventually c= hanged my position, but this was because it became increasingly evident to = me that the two goals (of exploring and promoting logical language, versus = promoting Lojban) are in fact antithetical; within LLG and the Lojban commu= nity, a victory for the one goal can be achieved only through the defeat of= the other; but success in the goal of promoting Lojban can be achieved onl= y within LLG and the Lojban community, whereas success in the goal of promo= ting logical language can be achieved outside it; many promoters of Lojban = (as opposed to logical language) have invested much of their life's wor= k in the enterprise, and pursuing the failure of another's life's w= ork should be avoided where possible; therefore LLG and the Lojban communit= y should be left to promote (conservative) Lojban unopposed (and therefore = must not be required to promote logical language).

>= =C2=A0 Indeed, there is a strong antipathy to other "logical languages= ", which I admit to sharing; I'm simply not interested, and never = have been - languages are too hard for me to learn, and IMHO too difficult = to properly "invent" with the complete full documentation needed = for new people to learn and use them.=C2=A0 So I hope selpa'i will forg= ive me if I don't look at his own efforts at a new "logical langua= ge".

This is all true, except that the Lojban that= Lojbab endorses is not a logical language, for all that it might falsely a= dvertise itself as such.=C2=A0

The antipathy Lojbab des= cribes exists because Lojban seeks to accrue users and promotes itself by f= alsely claiming to be a logical language. Any logical language is therefore= a rival to Lojban. And Lojban's false claim to be a logical language, = coupled with its comparative fame, is an obstacle to -- a distraction from = -- the promotion of logical language.




So LLG can adopt such research, if some LLG members want to do so, but unti= l then LLG considers supporting Lojban to be the best way to promote the pu= rposes described in the Bylaws.

Again, patent bullshit.=C2=A0


While I w= ould be only too delighted for the LLG to promote the purposes described in= the Bylaws, that would entail deprecating Lojban in its baselined and curr= ent forms. Given that LLG recruits from the Lojban community rather than fr= om the logical language community, it is obviously and not unreasonably the= case that the large majority of LLG members prioritize the promotion of Lo= jban over the promotion of the purposes described in the Bylaws.=C2=A0

--And.

_______________________________________________
Llg-members mailing list
Llg-members@lojban.org
http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-= members

--f403045f292850465605618695dc-- --===============1276463435487655194== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Llg-members mailing list Llg-members@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-members --===============1276463435487655194==--